
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $953 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 338.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 29.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 18,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,149 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $953 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 338.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 29.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 18,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,149 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX better than Core i5-13400F?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 202 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 138 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 183 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 116 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 86 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 73 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 46 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 557 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 485 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 351 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 478 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 424 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 356 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 296 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 299 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 217 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 772 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 637 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 568 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 494 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 599 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 494 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 376 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 431 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 344 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 243 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 836 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 836 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 823 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 725 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 836 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 745 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 630 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 540 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 594 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 540 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 468 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 405 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX

Core i5-13400F
Core i5-13400F
The Core i5-13400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 10 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 25,029 points. Launch price was $196.


Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 July 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Castle Peak (2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 33,455 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX uses Castle Peak (2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX's 33,455 — a 28.8% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 18,500 (13.2% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,652, a 37.2% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 11,500 (0.8% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 12 / 24+20% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+7% | 4.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 4 GHz+60% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 64 MB+220% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Castle Peak (2020) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 33,455+34% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | 18,500+14% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+46% | 1,652 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 11,500 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX uses sWRX8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | sWRX8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 2048 GB+967% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX rivals Xeon w5-2455X.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming | Professional Workstation |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX debuted at $1149. On MSRP ($196 vs $1149), the Core i5-13400F is $953 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 29.1 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — making the Core i5-13400F the 125.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-83% | $1149 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+339% | 29.1 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












